Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |  [ show all ]
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183249 -

None of your links -- not one of them -- mention any executive order signed by George Bush or even any presidential executive order at all. Most of them don't even mention the 199 document at all. One does mention it, but doesn't even quote from it, nor does it identify the memo as an Executive Order.

Finally, the photo from the BBC link shows about a paragraph of something written in 1996. No indication it is a Presidential Executive Order or anything other than an FBI memo. And of course, George Bush was not president in 1996.

Did the FBI do a bad job of tracking Islamic terrorists? Certainly. Was there a conspiracy originating from the White House to give the Jihadists free reign? Nope.

Your "evidence" is laughable. If you're going to provide links to try to prove a point, please at least provide links that actually refer to the evidence you are introducing. I wasted too much of my time combing through that crap looking for information to this mysterious "executive order", and not a single one of those freaking links even mentioned an executive order.

You want to know why we don't take you seriously? It's because of stunts like this. If I'm asked to back up my point, I provide links that have something to do with my freaking point! I suggest you do the same.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183254 -

So basically there is one known photo of the document, it was leaked by a man who is now dead, the full text is not available, no evidence exists at all showing that it is legitimate, and I am supposed to believe that it exists and is an order from the president?


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: Phred]
    #3183258 -

Did you lose your glasses? I'm not even going to bother.


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: z@z.com]
    #3183266 -

I'm not saying you have to believe anything. Though I will say that I have seen no documents suggesting the document doesn't exist, and if you know of any, I'm sure BBC would love to hear from you


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183269 -

No, I didn't lose my glasses. I read each of those links top to bottom. Nowhere does any of them mention a Presidential Executive Order titled w1991- whatever.

Feel free to prove me wrong. Should be easy -- provide the link, cut and paste a quote from the link and tell us where in the link it can be found -- i.e. "halfway down the page" or "seventh paragraph" or whatever.

Or if you wish, cut and paste the entire contents of the link and highlight the relevant section.

Those links were a complete waste of time because six of them don't even refer to Executive order w1991- whatever! Why are you having such difficulty grasping this?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183288 -

Quote:
I have seen no documents suggesting the document doesn't exist


Since when does it need to be shown something doesn't exist?

That's not how it works.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: Phred]
    #3183311 -

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_inganamort_010703_conspiracy.html

Another widely overlooked conspiracy theory about the events of September 11th is the reasoning for George W. Bush, shortly after becoming president, according to a widely available BBC News video, to issue Executive Order W199I-WF-213589, demanding that Federal investigators "back off" of the bin Ladens and the group ABL, because of it's relationship with WAMY,(World Assembly of Muslim Youth). According to a report prepared for the UN, Saudi Arabia has transferred $500 million to Al Qaeda over the past decade, yet like the bin Ladens themselves who were flown out of the US by the CIA after the attacks, they are above suspicion because of business dealings they have with the Bush Administration(s). Senator Bob Graham publicly admitted, based on information he has received, that at least one foreign country assisted the 9-11 terrorists, and we won't find out who that is for the next 20 or 30 years.


http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/tyranny/

W199I - restricting the investigation

A couple months before 9/11 George W. Bush signed W199I threatening FBI investigators with arrest if they try to arrest members of the Al Queda. George Bush signed the papers, he is a traitor to humanity. He is business partners wit Osama Bin Laden and deserves to be thrown in jail.

Within days of 9/11, the Bush Administration provided safe passage out of the US for 14 members of the Bin Laden family, without interrogation.

In 1996 the Clinton Administration discouraged the FBI from investigating links between Osama Bin Laden's brothers Abdulla and Omar and the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), a known terrorist front organization.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4293682,00.html

FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington say they were prevented for political reasons from carrying out full investigations into members of the Bin Laden family in the US before the terrorist attacks of September 11.


=========

BBC is of course the main source for "W199I" specifically, as that is where O'neil was said to have originally leaked the information to. Although as you can see in that guardian report, it was stated by FBI officials and defence intel that there was something getting in the way of their investigations..makes me wonder what might that have been?

Personally, I think the fact that he was hired and died on his first day on the job in the WTC sounds VERY suspicious. Again, if anybody has anything suggesting the document never existed, I'd love to see it, as would BBC and probably everybody else who has come into contact with this information.


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183343 -

Quote:
ekomstop said:
Again, if anybody has anything suggesting the document never existed, I'd love to see it, as would BBC aswell as probably everyone else who has come across this information.


I hold in my hand a document proving that there was no link between GWB and 9-11. It also proves beyond a doubt that Kerry is behind the attacks. I will not show you the text of this document, but I will tell you that I got it from an alien who burst into flames after leaking it to me. If you don't like it feel free to provide evidence that this document does not exist.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: z@z.com]
    #3183361 -

Bush..Kerry..whats the difference?  :smirk:


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183374 -

Here's the full article from the guardian since the link is cut off by that comma..


FBI claims Bin Laden inquiry was frustrated

Officials told to 'back off' on Saudis before September 11

Greg Palast and David Pallister
Guardian

Wednesday November 7, 2001

FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington say they were prevented for political reasons from carrying out full investigations into members of the Bin Laden family in the US before the terrorist attacks of September 11.

US intelligence agencies have come under criticism for their wholesale failure to predict the catastrophe at the World Trade Centre. But some are complaining that their hands were tied.

FBI documents shown on BBC Newsnight last night and obtained by the Guardian show that they had earlier sought to investigate two of Osama bin Laden's relatives in Washington and a Muslim organisation, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), with which they were linked.

The FBI file, marked Secret and coded 199, which means a case involving national security, records that Abdullah bin Laden, who lived in Washington, had originally had a file opened on him "because of his relationship with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth - a suspected terrorist organisation".

WAMY members deny they have been involved with terrorist activities, and WAMY has not been placed on the latest list of terrorist organisations whose assets are being frozen.

Abdullah, who lived with his brother Omar at the time in Falls Church, a town just outside Washington, was the US director of WAMY, whose offices were in a basement nearby.

But the FBI files were closed in 1996 apparently before any conclusions could be reached on either the Bin Laden brothers or the organisation itself. High-placed intelligence sources in Washington told the Guardian this week: "There were always constraints on investigating the Saudis".

They said the restrictions became worse after the Bush administration took over this year. The intelligence agencies had been told to "back off" from investigations involving other members of the Bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, and possible Saudi links to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan.

"There were particular investigations that were effectively killed."

Only after the September 11 attacks was the stance of political and commercial closeness reversed towards the other members of the large Bin Laden clan, who have classed Osama bin Laden as their "black sheep".

Yesterday, the head of the Saudi-based WAMY's London office, Nouredine Miladi, said the charity was totally against Bin Laden's violent methods. "We seek social change through education and cooperation, not force."

He said Abdullah bin Laden had ceased to run WAMY's US operation a year ago.

Neither Abdullah nor Omar bin Laden could be contacted in Saudi Arabia for comment.

WAMY was founded in 1972 in a Saudi effort to prevent the "corrupting" ideas of the west ern world influencing young Muslims. With official backing it grew to embrace 450 youth and student organisations with 34 offices worldwide.

Its aim was to encourage "concerned Muslims to take up the challenge by arming the youth with sound understanding of Islam, guarding them against destructive ideologies, and instilling in them level-headed wisdom".

In Britain it has 20 associated organisations, many highly respectable.

But as long as 10 years ago it was named as a discreet channel for public and private Saudi donations to hardline Islamic organisations. One of the recipients of its largesse has been the militant Students Islamic Movement of India, which has lent support to Pakistani-backed terrorists in Kashmir and seeks to set up an Islamic state in India.

Since September 11 WAMY has been investigated in the US along with a number of other Muslim charities. There have been several grand jury investigations but no findings have been made against any of them.

Current FBI interest in WAMY is shown in their agents' interrogation of a radiologist from San Antonio, Texas, Dr Al Badr al-Hazmi, who was arrested on September 12 and released without charge two weeks later. He had the same surname as two of the plane hijackers.

He was also questioned about his contacts with Abdullah bin Laden at the US WAMY office.

Mr Al-Hazmi said that he had made phone calls to Abdullah bin Laden in 1999 trying to obtain books and videotapes about Islamic teachings for the Islamic Centre of San Antonio.


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183607 -

ekomstop's quote from a prisonplanet screed:

Quote:
Another widely overlooked conspiracy theory about the events of September 11th is the reasoning for George W. Bush, shortly after becoming president, according to a widely available BBC News video, to issue Executive Order W199I-WF-213589, demanding that Federal investigators "back off" of the bin Ladens and the group ABL, because of it's relationship with WAMY,(World Assembly of Muslim Youth).


Sigh. The only content we have seen of this "widely available" Executive Order W199I-WF-213589 is roughly a paragraph of something purported to be an FBI memo (which does not say it is an Executive Order signed by any president, and doesn't display the numbers W1991-WF-213589) from 1996 -- long before Bush was president.

Someone else earlier in the thread pointed out doubts that the video is even a BBC video.

This is all hogwash.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: Phred]
    #3183659 -

The guardian isn't 'legitimate' enough a source for you either?


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183661 -

GREAT!

So, if BBC has all this information, I'm sure you can provide us with some BBC articles, FROM THE BBC... about the BBC "W" document.

Christ! My first post today asked you to provide the same link.

If BBC is the source, link me to where BBC says anything about it.

How can this discussion go on when the person who started won't provide his own research.

If it weren't so damn funny, this'd be a total waste of time.

In my first post today I said,

Quote:
"ZAZ is looking for a copy of W199I-WF-213589, from a legitimate news source. The entire text, from beginning to end. "



Then, another post,
Quote:
"Yes, but I said, you should link ZAZ to the full text of the document, from a LEGITIMATE, objective, news source. Just 'cause you linked to the BBC doesn't mean your prescious BBC Link had the FULL TEXT... or any text for that matter. The link with the text was a conspiracy link. And if memory serves me... it was not the full text. "



In reguards to the BBC link,
Quote:
"I have already said, Show me where you found that link. It doesn't come up when you search the BBC website. "



Later I asked three questions:

Quote:
" 1. Why is there no BBC trademark on your BBC video link?

2. Why does nobody in the video or narration speak with an English accent?

3. (not a question... but still) Show me where you found that link. It doesn't come up when you search the BBC website."



Patiently, I tried again in yet another post,
Quote:
"Can you provide any legitimate links to the "W" document?"



That's when Pinky and Zaz chimed in asking you for the same information.

Thanks for ignoring everybody, while calling us names.

Are you a paranoid schizophrenic? Are you insane? Do you like the attention? Or are you just fucking with us?

Where are the answers we want? It is OK to admit it if you can't find any.

This is entertaining, but really, your antics are better suited for OTD.

Hurry and answer, or stop wasting our time.

Oh, and don't change damn the subject again.

Otherwise, you're just abusing this forum and its members. You know better.

Oh, and I am still waiting to find out what any of this has to do with Teeny-tiny nukes and WTC 7.

What a crock.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: Rose]
    #3183731 -

The best article I have found is the one by the guardian up above, the only reference I could find to BBC was the video which they aired on Nightline. The guardian references back the BBC, while also stating that they aquired the documents from them. I am not trying to play games, but merly try and open some people up to the fact that your government consists of a bunch of corrupt liars. If it seems like I am intentionally changing the subject on you, I appologize for the confusion, but this is all pertinent information IMO, and as you said earlier, one should give connecting the dots a try.

so tell me, is the guardian a legitimate enough source for you?


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183760 -

Unfortunately, no. As far as I can tell, the guardian is not considered an Objective news source.

Just because a websight is not an objective news source doesn't mean they are completely bullshit (The Shroomery, for example, is not an objective news source... but it still has its moments)... still, your guardian link is far from the smoking gun you need to prove this point.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183765 -

No. The Guardian is a leftist rag.

Besides, in this case they are referencing something mentioned in a televised news segment. The Guardian has never seen the document in question, has no way of verifying its authenticity, and is basically just recapping what they saw on TV. "This guy said thus and so" doesn't authenticate anything.

If the BBC is truly in possession of a copy of a real Presidential Executive Order from 1996, it stands to reason they would do more with it than mention it once on a single news segment.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: Phred]
    #3183809 -

I don't know, man..

"FBI documents shown on BBC Newsnight last night and obtained by the Guardian show that they had earlier sought to investigate two of Osama bin Laden's relatives in Washington and a Muslim organisation, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), with which they were linked."

Quote:
If the BBC is truly in possession of a copy of a real Presidential Executive Order from 1996, it stands to reason they would do more with it than mention it once on a single news segment.




I don't know where your getting 1996 from, the document has 2001 written on it, aswell as the news report itself. Also, I'm not sure they would be too crazy with the idea in bringing this stuff into the mainstream..I mean, look what happened to O'neil, Kennedy, Tesla, ect, ect, ect..


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183908 -

Good God, man! Don't you freaking read this shit before you post it?????

The quote you supplied says nothing about the Guardian receiving Presidential Executive Orders! It talks about FBI documents. Can you not grasp the difference between "Presidential Executive Order" and "FBI document"????

I don't know where your getting 1996 from, the document has 2001 written on it...

What document? If you go to your own freaking link and actually look at it for more than a second and a half you'll see there are two documents in the image. One is laid crosswise over the other, obscuring almost all of the bottom document. The one on the bottom is dated September 13, 2001 true, but it's certainly no Executive Order. It is clearly (presuming it's not a fake like Dan Rather's famous forgeries) an FBI communication. The one on top is quite obviously an FBI communication of one sort or the other from 1996. And the infamous "1991-WF-213589" is not the number of a Presidential Executive Order, it is the FBI's case number for the subject in question. It says so right on the document itself, fa cryin' out loud!

"Case ID : 1991-WF-213589"

Even the format of the numbers is wrong. Here is a link to real executive orders signed by Bush. Note their format -- "12543", "12333", etc. A simple 5 digit number. No dashes, no letters, no prefixes. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/orders/

Also note the formal and legalistic language of the orders. Not even close to the style of writing in the information memos the FBI uses when discussing ongoing cases.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: ekomstop]
    #3183922 -

ekomstop writes:

Also, I'm not sure they would be too crazy with the idea in bringing this stuff into the mainstream..I mean, look what happened to O'neil, Kennedy, Tesla, ect, ect, ect..

Oh, right. They have no problem televising the accusation on BBC -- do you not believe BBC is mainstream?

"Nope, they won't assassinate us for televising stuff. But we sure as hell better not ever make the same accusations in print with actual proof, or we might end up like Kennedy or Tesla."

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Fa [Re: Phred]
    #3183990 -

Interesting. Thanks for pointing that out, upon looking into this it seems that the reference to 1996 is actualy said to be something different, I am going to have to look into it further. Are you looking at this: http://www.propagandamatrix.com/W199I.gif ? The paper is referencing to 1996, not claiming the order was written in 1996. To clarify, can you point out which link you are reading that states it was documented in 1996?

I believe this is what they are referencing to:

http://gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=103&row=1
But the FBI files were closed in 1996 apparently before any conclusions could be reached on either the Bin Laden brothers or the organisation itself. High-placed intelligence sources in Washington told the Guardian this week: "There were always constraints on investigating the Saudis".

Looks like this may have been going on longer than I had originaly anticipated..

Also, the format of the numbers in secret documents differ from those which are made public.

in addition, to quote from the guardian article: "The FBI file, marked Secret and coded 199, which means a case involving national security,"


--------------------
Pot cures cancer.  Tell your friends.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* World Trade Center Attacks..Political Implications
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 shellacct 9,114 72 10/30/11 11:03 AM
by mm.
* The World Trade Center Demolition
( 1 2 3 all )		 Static 4,760 54 08/01/03 11:11 AM
by silversoul7
* No Justification for the WTC Bombings?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Ravus 5,037 83 11/12/04 02:23 PM
by Phluck
* Conspiracy Theorists, flash movie about the Pentagon
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 daussaulit 4,352 61 09/05/04 11:43 PM
by ekomstop
* Why the media's conspiracy theory is better than yours
( 1 2 all )		 ekomstop 4,533 31 09/23/04 03:27 PM
by ekomstop
* Why the "tanks on the planes" 9--1 conspiracy theory is shit
( 1 2 all )		 RandalFlagg 5,201 35 09/13/04 12:45 AM
by Zahid
* Are they building a pipeline through Afghanistan.. Senor_Doobie 1,400 11 06/14/02 04:01 AM
by Rono
* 3000 bombs in 48 hours
( 1 2 all )		 pattern 2,676 38 03/17/03 05:48 PM
by Skikid16

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
18,569 topic views. 4 members, 12 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.045 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 17 queries.